Poll: Call of Duty 5 - W.W. 2 - Shit or The Shit

Recommended Videos

Reep

New member
Jul 23, 2008
677
0
0
Joshing post=9.69161.657062 said:
Spierek post=9.69161.653786 said:
Jolly Madness post=9.69161.652636 said:
WW2 is done to death... Grow up game designers!
Umm... And what about a WWII game, where you can play as a Nazi / Russian, and fight against the good? Or to do Pearl Harbor attack again, and again, but with different roles (plane, submarine, battleship, infantry, etc.).

As you can see, there are many things, that weren't used yet. But the developers seem to love feeding us the same American Shit Apple Pie again, and again.

It hasn't been made because no self respecting publisher would touch it with a 10 foot pole and for good reason. Lets make a game where your objective is to hit the WTC with 2 jets, while we're at it. Talk about bad taste. Actually I think developers have a bit of common sense. As an American, if you can bring yourself to play as a Nazi or Japanese killing American soldiers, seek a therapist and fast. If you're not American, then you wouldn't understand.
What about one where u play an american bombing Japan? Theres some patriotism for ya.
 

franzuu

New member
Jun 4, 2008
27
0
0
I feel that WWII isn't milked to death yet.

The Winter War could be 1 of the campaigns where you could be either a Russian or a Finnish, although Finland lost land in that war they succeeded at preventing Finland from being occupied by Russia, so I would rather play as a Finnish.
Also the Finnish had 30 tanks and 130 aircraft while Russia had 6500 tanks and 3800 aircraft.
Finland had 250,000 men while Russia had 1,000,000 men and Finland managed to maintain a 5/1 kill/death ratio. Russia also lost 2300 tanks. I feel that that theater would make for some interesting defensive battles where you eventually have to retreat and the Finnish ski soldiers could be used in assaults and ambushes.
 

airsoftmanic

New member
Aug 6, 2008
23
0
0
do you know the only reason why there are millions of WW2 games? because americans make them and thats the only war they've really "won".
the reason im looking in on COD5 is the co-op and the jungle fighting. it'll give a new edge on it so its not the same Nazis, its japanese this time so it will not revert to what i call "whack-a-mole" shootouts where you sit at one end of a map and kill enemies as they pop up. they'll be hiding in trees, puddles and in secret trapdoors.
it wont be GOTY, but it'll be in the top 10 of this years games
 

Wadders

New member
Aug 16, 2008
3,796
0
0
I think Treyarch have had 2 years development time on it, rather than the 1yr they had for cod3, and they're using the cod4 engine, so they will have had a lot more time on their hands to look at what went wrong and see how they can change it, making for a better game. Also the only other WW2 games set in the pacific suck.
 

pJaay

New member
Aug 22, 2008
16
0
0
rising sun hits the next gen... yeah great, just what we all wanted -.-

But it does has the possibility to be a decent game, but why not cover a different war for once?
 

Zorg Machine

New member
Jul 28, 2008
1,304
0
0
why not make think of something new like giant ants have taken over the world and as a genetically engineered fish you must take out their hills and destroy the queen to save humanity
 

Reep

New member
Jul 23, 2008
677
0
0
cabooze post=9.69161.657964 said:
why not make think of something new like giant ants have taken over the world and as a genetically engineered fish you must take out their hills and destroy the queen to save humanity

holy crap, that made me laugh hard
/highfive
 

RYjet911

New member
May 11, 2008
501
0
0
I think this game could be good... I'm just hoping they don't throw everything they learnt from CoD 4 and throw it off a bridge.

Everything bad about the CoD series was fixed with the fourth game, and I hope that despite the game being set in World War 2 again, it uses the great story telling style of Cod 4, has a larger variety of weapons and isn't just CoD 3 with better graphics.
 

pJaay

New member
Aug 22, 2008
16
0
0
I frimly believe that the game will be much better if the grandfarther of gaz(cod4) is in it :D
 

Syphonz

New member
Aug 22, 2008
1,255
0
0
jacobschndr post=9.69161.651798 said:
over 400+ games made about world war II, WWII GAME faster than you can say "the nazis bombed pearl harbor".
over 400 games on WWII alone? now your being ridiculous. oh wait, you've just been further demoted to retarded for believing Nazi's bombed pearl harbour.

tbh, yes, the WWII theme is rather old and mainstream...but you know what? guess who else fed you the same shit 3x in a row without changing much? HALO!
 

pJaay

New member
Aug 22, 2008
16
0
0
Syphonz post=9.69161.658066 said:
jacobschndr post=9.69161.651798 said:
over 400+ games made about world war II, WWII GAME faster than you can say "the nazis bombed pearl harbor".


tbh, yes, the WWII theme is rather old and mainstream...but you know what? guess who else fed you the same shit 3x in a row without changing much? HALO!
And look what fun that gave us... 0.o
 

LordCraigus

New member
May 21, 2008
454
0
0
Correct me if I'm wrong but did someone mention Germany and Russia fighting alongside against the 'good' during WWII?

First of all, I wish CoD would leave WWII alone for the developers who actually want to do something good with the genre. Alas, this obviously isn't happening any time soon.

So, my thoughts on CoD 5... not a lot we haven't seen before, though at least they're going with the less 'popular' Pacific Theatre and I'm happy they haven't neglected the Eastern Front with the battle of Berlin being included. Hopefully it'll be better than CoD3, though in one video interview I saw the two representatives of Treyarch were complete pricks.

I say this all the time but I want to see a WWII FPS set entirely on the Eastern Front, one that does justice to the history. With the scale and type of warfare that was waged, between two of the most globally 'unpopular' nations and ideologies of the 20th century, it'd be hard to glorify the events that took place, assuming you took a realistic and historically accurate approach. Of course I say all of this as someone with an immense interest in this particular theatre of the war.

Mainly I'd just like to see a war game that plays more like an historical account than a movie. When it comes to games I'm someone who gets a kick out of the experience, rather than the slaughtering of opponents, so when it comes to WWII games I'm not content with just mowing down waves of Axis troops. As such I don't think games should be the only form of media that can't be educational and interesting, at least to some.
 

Gunrunner

New member
Jul 20, 2008
17
0
0
i think it would be better if they continued just making modern or even future style COD's except one thing bugs me is that you are always fighting arabs or russians, why not fight the chinese or the australians or something? mix the shit up a bit or the modern era games will also get boring.
 

Syphonz

New member
Aug 22, 2008
1,255
0
0
pJaay post=9.69161.658130 said:
Syphonz post=9.69161.658066 said:
jacobschndr post=9.69161.651798 said:
over 400+ games made about world war II, WWII GAME faster than you can say "the nazis bombed pearl harbor".


tbh, yes, the WWII theme is rather old and mainstream...but you know what? guess who else fed you the same shit 3x in a row without changing much? HALO!
And look what fun that gave us... 0.o
This can be seen in a good or bad way...for me, and most of the people i play with, its bad. to us, Halo is nothing more than mediocracy with a imaginitive setting, but overall uninspiring 'innovation' that everyone makes it out to be. Others enjoy it as its the best thing since underwear, and thats them. I'll disagree strongly, but won't scold them for it.
 

stompy

New member
Jan 21, 2008
2,951
0
0
ElArabDeMagnifico post=9.69161.654180 said:
How about Brothers in Arms Hells Highway? Looks pretty good but OMG WWII!!!
That's what I'm trying to say: regardless of the setting, Brothers in Arms will be awesome. Hell, the historical accuracy of the game actually draws me into the game.

Oh, and this title is definitely at the top of my to-get list this year.
 

cordovajack

New member
Nov 23, 2008
1
0
0
Call of duty 5 was just like all 12&3 absolutley awesome four 3 to 4 days. afterwards weak as hell.
the online gameplay sucks compared to cod4 its all snipers and hiding in bushes.
now we have SUPER CLAYMORES-(bouncing bettys) ghillie suits that change with the level.
and fucking shit to hiding behind every six inches.
all of the revoulutionary things cod4 had were shrunk down.
shooting through walls is almost useless.
MGs just make loud noises.
knifes win over bayonets(wtf right?)
accuracy on every sub machine gun sucks.
AND WORST OF ALL YOU HAVE TO EXPECT ABOUT 5 TO TEN SPAWN KILLS in A GOOD GAME.



seriously the only thing i think is kepping this game alive is zombie mode. and even then. you should be allowed outside. i mean come on your supposed to hang out in the same 3 rooms for the 37 hours it takes to get to level 50? not to mention those nerds who got to 96
 

jakefongloo221

New member
Aug 17, 2008
91
0
0
wow this is really late and i was just reminicing but ww2 is the only war we've ever won? i dearly hope you are not from america because thats just sad
revolutionary war
american spanish war
civil war
ww1
ww2
cold war (the fact that it was averted makes it a win) (cumban missle crises as well)
and a shit ton more that i don't remember seriously dude wikipedia, history channel, SOMETHING cause that just embarrised me